slowrunner77 (6336) - Reno, Nevada, USA - OCT 14, 2014
0.7 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 2/20
"Had a mini Indian beer taste-off between Blue Himalayan and Taj Mahal. Not expecting greatness from either commercially produced lager, but here I go anyway. Look-same light straw color while pouring. TM is typical macro lager. Canít even say that for BH...slightly hazy...slightly. Even pouring down the middle produces little or no head. Aroma-both typical macro lager aroma, with a slight extra unpleasantness to the BH. Feel-BH is flat, and as the aroma and taste are not good either, the mouthfeel is horrible too. TM isnít good, but has better carbonation and isnít as repulsive. flavor-BH rivals the worst of the American macros...no way in hell iím finishing this. TM is closer to average but still donít want to finish. overall, Blue Himalayan is foul pee water, while Taj Mahal is somewhere between horrible and respectable, although a little closer to the former. No more Indian beer for me. Iíll be dumping 18 of the 22 oz of BH, and probably wonít quite finish the TM either."
JohnnyJ (4728) - San Diego, California, USA - AUG 14, 2011
1.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
Bottle from bevmo. Pale clear piss yellow, small white head. Cheap grain, sweetness, and musty. Drinkable I geuss, but I wouldnít want to try it again.
daknole (10007) - Scottsdale, Arizona, USA - MAY 4, 2011
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 9/20
Pale yellow. Flavor and aromas are all malt. Refreshing but not all so great.
blutt59 (6092) - Dallas, Texas, USA - AUG 29, 2008
3.3 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
650 ml, 05, pale yellow color, slight foamy head, nose is faint sweetness, flavor is mild fruit hops with a good finish, easy drinker
soulgrowl (52) - Kitakyushu-shi, JAPAN - MAY 7, 2008
2.1 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
Aroma: I couldnít get anything from this beer in terms of aroma at first, so I let it warm a bit. Still nothing. A very light lemon scent, and a demi-sec champagne or riesling character. Weak.
Appearance: Boring, crystal clear yellow-orange. White, fleeting head. Lame.
Flavor: Better than the smell, but still needs help. Definitely white wine-esque, well-balanced sweetness but terribly bland. There is a bit of dryness, but this beer is not hoppy in the least. At least it wasnít skunky. Better than most macros, Iíd say.
Palate: Light, smooth, and inoffensive.
Overall: Meh. I ordered this at an Indian restaurant, and I was really hoping for something bolder and more hoppy to match the food. Surprisingly, the beer held its own against my meal, and the spicy chicken I ordered helped bring out its citric sweetness. Still, there are better choices for spicy food, especially for how expensive this was.
dwyerpg (4732) - Las Vegas, Nevada, USA - MAR 14, 2008
1.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
UPDATED: APR 21, 2010 Lots of funk, buttery, not the same beer as I remembered. Quite untasty. Perhaps this one was old, but it definitely wasnít good
First rating 3.3 A light malty blue. This is pretty nice. LIght with a light maltiness up front and a tiny hop bite in the finish.
ABUSEDGOAT (2416) - California, USA - MAR 8, 2008
2 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 8/20
Clear yellow, moderate head that dissipates fairly quickly. Aroma is grain, bread, not much else. Light bodied, sweet bread flavor. Moderate to high carbonation. Not much else to say.
MontereyJimbo (79) - Monterey, California, USA - JAN 26, 2008
3.8 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
This is a fairly mild lager with a very nice balance of mild spicy hops and malt. It is very drinkable, goes down easily with very little aftertaste. I really like it, but the masochistic dark ale crowd (NBS) wonít because it doesnít corrode mucus membranes.
bhensonb (11904) - Woodland, California, USA - SEP 17, 2007
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
650 mL brown bottle. The aroma is unusual. Musty, floral hop? Peppery hop? Standard gold color with a white head that filmed quickly. Thin to medium in body with mild, approaching creamy, carbonation. The flavor is outstanding. The mouth tingles with pepper or spice. Not hot, but a non-bitter hop, Iím surmising. Itís got enough floral to satisfy a light ale drinker. Spicy, peppery hop can be found in English lagers, so mayhap this represents a lingering tradition from colonial days. Sikkim has only been part of India since about 1975. Whatever, itís not the typical lager drain pour. Hoisting this one to the Empire.
badlizard (5535) - Berkeley, California, USA - AUG 15, 2007
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
650 ml bottle from Taste of India. Clear pale yellow with a fizzy white head, malty aroma and taste, and a clean crisp finish.